Harsh sanctions for Sudan?

<p>Let us thank China for pressuring Sudan to finally accept the deployment of some 26,000 peacekeeping troops in the Darfur region. However, it is not without a bargain. At this time, Sudan wanted that all the troops be made up of Africans. Of all countries, it seemed only China has the clout and influence to exert pressures on the Sudanese government, which was believed to be one of the prime sources of oil for China.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Needless to say, Sudan has no choice at all except to kneel down to what China wanted, considering that the latter has a big stake in Sudan’s oil development projects. And who knows, maybe, China is also supplying arms and ammunations to Sudan, in exchange for oil? Whatever it is, it seemed the ball is now in the hands of the U.N. body. However, the U.N. is still facing a dilemma on how to deal with the political crisis head on. The crux of the matter now&nbsp; lies as to whether the U.N. is capable of sourcing out the 26,000 peacekeeping troops that it needed for deployment to end the conflict in Darfur, where some 200,000 have been killed already since the war erupted there.</p>
<p>And it isn’t fair and uncalled for that a government that has committed murders against innocent people is still given the leeway to pick a choice for its own advantage. Why can’t they just agree squarely on getting things done and instead source out troops from outside Africa, whom they feel are neutral for the cause of international humanitarian peace. Until the Sudanese government and the U.N. meet halfway to iron out a concrete solution, the grim nightmares that haunt many Darfuris will continue to be a great concern for the world to see. A good suggestion, perhaps, is for the U.N. to give harsh sanctions to Sudan, should it fail to commit to peace and harmony in Darfur, in consonance to the U.N. Security Council resolution. At least, it will give Sudan and other rogue nations a lesson to learn from their mistakes.</p>